Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T00:32:28.762Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Composition, technology and provenance of Roman pottery from Napoca (Cluj-Napoca, Romania)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2019

Ágnes Gál
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Corina Ionescu*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania Archeotechnologies & Archeological Material Sciences Laboratory, Institute of International Relations, History and Oriental Studies, Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, Tatarstan, Russia
Mátyás Bajusz
Affiliation:
National Museum of History of Transylvania, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Vlad A. Codrea
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Volker Hoeck
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania Division Geography and Geology, Paris Lodron University, Salzburg, Austria
Lucian Barbu-Tudoran
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania National Institute for Research and Development of Isotopic and Molecular Technologies – INCDTIM, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Viorica Simon
Affiliation:
Faculty of Physics, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania Interdisciplinary Research Institute on Bio-Nano-Sciences, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca Romania
Marieta Mureșan-Pop
Affiliation:
Interdisciplinary Research Institute on Bio-Nano-Sciences, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca Romania
Zsolt Csók
Affiliation:
National Museum of History of Transylvania, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Second-century CE (common era) household pottery sherds found in the city of Napoca (present day Cluj-Napoca, Romania) in Roman Dacia were investigated by polarized light optical microscopy, X-ray powder diffraction, Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy and cold field emission scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy to obtain information on technology, raw materials and site of production. Compositionally, all samples are similar with comparable fine and semi-fine microstructures and oriented microtextures. Optically, there is a gradual transition from microcrystalline to an amorphous illitic-muscovitic matrix. The small aplastic inclusions are mostly quartz and feldspar. Fine-grained carbonate aggregates are distributed inhomogeneously in the ceramic body. Well-preserved Middle Miocene foraminifera tests are characteristic of the ceramics. The gradual thermal changes of the matrix and the newly formed phases upon firing, such as ‘ceramic melilite’, Fe-gehlenite, clinopyroxene, glass, hematite and some maghemite support inferences regarding the technological constraints in producing the pottery. The firing took place in a mostly oxidizing atmosphere and the temperature extended from at least 850°C to >900°C. The Middle Miocene marly clay from the area surrounding the site shows similar mineralogical and micropalaeontological contents to those of the ceramic specimens and is the best candidate for the raw material used for local production of the Roman pottery.

Information

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2018 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Location of the archaeological excavations from 2013, 2016 and 2017 projected on the St Michael's Church plan made by M & M Studio and the National Museum of Transylvanian History. (b) Simplified geological map (based on Mészáros & Clichici, 1988) of the surroundings of Cluj-Napoca. The black rectangle marks the limits of the Roman city Napoca (Rusu-Bolindeț, 2007). The inset in the upper right marks the position of the map area within Romania. The location of the Roman pottery kilns follows the descriptions of Ardevan (2001) and Rusu-Bolindeț (2007).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. The colouring and internal structures of the 21 Roman sherds as seen in freshly cross-cut surfaces of the slices used for the thin sections. The scale bar is 1 cm for all samples.

Figure 2

Table 1. List of samples studied and their typological and macroscopic characteristics.

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Polarized light photomicrographs of pottery sherds. (a) Anisotropic matrix in SfM-13 (imitation of terra sigillata), with fragments of feldspar, quartz (white and grey spots) and slightly thermally transformed micritic limestone; chaotic texture. (b,c) Mostly anisotropic matrix (light parts in the images), with isolated isotropic areas (dark parts in the images) due to sintering; the muscovite lamellar arrangement marks the oriented texture in samples SfM-6 (b) and SfM-8 (c). Indeterminate planktonic foraminifera (F) in (b). (d) Isotropic matrix, with crystalline quartz, micas (elongated light spots) and quartzite and micritic limestone lithoclasts; SfM-16. (e) Mix of carbonate-poor (Mx1) and carbonate-rich (Mx2) clayey material in SfM-10; oriented texture. (f) Calcite crystals lining the walls of a void in SfM-8. Mineral abbreviations according to Whitney & Evans (2010) are used here: Fsp = feldspar, Qz = quartz, Ms = muscovite, Cal = calcite. Additional abbreviations: Mx = matrix, Qzt = quartzite, Lm = limestone. All images with crossed polarizers (P+). Scale bar is 50 µm, except for (d), where it is 100 µm.

Figure 4

Fig. 4. Photomicrographs of fossil foraminifera tests in pottery sherds (a,b) and in Lower Badenian rocks (c–f). (a) Globigerina sp. (1, 2) and indeterminate foraminifera (3) in sample SfM-6, crossed polarizers. (b) Trilobatus sp. in sample SfM-14, crossed polarizers. (c) Globigerina sp. (indicated by arrowhead), in sample Clay-3, single polarizer. (d) Same image, with crossed polarizers. (e) Numerous foraminifera tests in sample Clay-3: Trilobatus sp. (1), Candorbulina sp. (2) and Globigerina sp. (3) single polarizer. (f) Same image, with crossed polarizers; the rock shows zones richer in carbonates (Cal). Scale bar is 50 µm for all images.

Figure 5

Table 2. Optical characteristics of the matrix and phase compositions of the ceramic sherds resulting from OM and the main firing phases, based on XRPD.

Figure 6

Fig. 5. XRD traces of the Roman potsherds arranged, from bottom to top, according to decreasing intensity of the 10 Å peak of illite-muscovite. Abbreviations as previously, additionally: Ilt-Ms = illite-muscovite.

Figure 7

Fig. 6. (a) FTIR spectra of the ceramic samples in the regions 2750–4000 cm–1 and 300–1750 cm–1. (b) Deconvoluted spectra for samples SfM-6, SfM-17 and SfM-24 of the main band (800–1300 cm–1) and phase assignment for each individual contributing band. The fitted spectrum overlaps the experimental one for each deconvolution. (c) Diagram of the FWHM measured for the absorption band centred at 1060 cm–1, arranged in increasing value order. The figures within the bars show the central position for the main bands of the spectra.

Figure 8

Fig. 7. SE images and EDX spectra for the ceramic sherds. (a) Sintered Fe-rich illite-like matrix, quartz grains and muscovite lamellae in sample SfM-1. (b) EDX spectrum of Ca-poor illite-like matrix in SfM-1. (c) Sintered mass of phyllosilicates forming a Ca-rich illite-like matrix in SfM-6. Remnants of a fossil foraminifera test containing a cluster of calcite crystals. (d) EDX spectrum of the matrix in SfM-6. (e) Sample SfM-18 showing a glassy matrix (gs) with bloating pores and a decomposed carbonate aggregate replaced by a fine-grained firing phase (fph). (f) EDX spectrum of glass in SfM-18. (g) Glassy network in SfM-17. (h) Details of the ‘wrinkled’ surface of the glass. The white rectangles in (a), (b) and (c) mark the surfaces where the spectra were collected. Abbreviations, as previously. Scale bars: 20 µm for (a) and (c); 10 µm for (e); and 500 nm for (g) and (h).

Figure 9

Fig. 8. SE images and EDX spectra for firing phases. (a) Cluster of ‘ceramic melilite’ crystals and scattered microspheres in sample SfM-11. (b) EDX spectrum of ‘ceramic melilite’ crystals. (c) A microsphere with a wrinkled surface, formed on the inner wall of a foraminifera test in SfM-11. (d) EDX spectrum of the microsphere. (e) Dendritic crystals of Fe-gehlenite (Gh) in SfM-24. (f) EDX spectrum of Fe-gehlenite. Scale bar is 1 µm.

Figure 10

Table 3. Chemical composition (wt.%) of sintered matrix (mx) and glass (gs) resulting from SEM-EDX.

Figure 11

Table 4. Chemical composition of firing phases in ceramics resulting from SEM-EDX (wt.%).

Figure 12

Fig. 9. SE images and EDX spectra showing the large variability of clinopyroxene composition. (a) Cluster of clinopyroxene grains in sample SfM-15 (for composition, see point SfM-15-2 in Table 4). (b) EDX spectrum of clinopyroxene. (c) Cluster of clinopyroxene grains in SfM-19 (for composition, see point SfM-19-21 in Table 4). (d) EDX spectrum of clinopyroxene. The white rectangles in (a) and (c) mark the surfaces where the spectra were collected. Scale bar is 1 µm.